Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    September 8, 2014 4:30am-5:01am PDT

4:30 am
space. which is really important is there are existing assets in the community that residents are connected to and can't get by just by walking through the site. we'll be increasing access through daniel webster and the neighborhood house. this doesn't necessarily touch on what you are considering, but part of rebuilt potrero includes the comprehensive program delivery strategy. we have been on-site now since 2008 implementing community building activities and developed a model called transcommunity building and recognize the stress that families have been under and engaged residents on trying to reduce some of that toxic stress and build resiliency and lay the foundation in this change. we are working with community based organization with hope sf services team and working with a series of
4:31 am
foundations with hopes of fundraising and working with san francisco health institute and looking for the implementation of this project. this is an example of some of the activities we have going on everyday. that's it. >> hi. rich -- department staff. it's a mid-20th century public housing complex that includes about 61 buildings and 606 units. the housing complex was completed this two phases with the potrero terrace built in 1941 and the other one in 1954. the department took number of consultation with resource
4:32 am
consultants to analyze the buildings with church landscape. we found the project was significant in architecture as one of the super block public housing complexes built before world war ii. however, in general, over across the entire site, integrity was lacking in a lot of major areas due to number of alterations over the lifetime of the project which basically determines that thus be concluded that there is no historic resource present on the project site. this review coinciding with both the sea kwa review as well as section review that is from the document. i'm happy to answer any questions.
4:33 am
>> commissioners, questions from staff? anybody? commissioner jack ? >> yes, this is very admirable what you are accomplishing here on rebuild potrero, my question is so much of this whole idea about reorienting the neighborhood to the city. as you say there is not loose of integrity there because of at the -- deterioration and i'm wondering what more we can do with that and what we can do about reorienting the neighborhood. >> do you want to speak to that?
4:34 am
definitary there would be a lot of documentation through the transformation process and working with neighborhood house to document and to show the progression of transformation. that's something we would want to do. we also have done a number of events already that are about recognizing the current culture and the current environment within potrero and really making sure that the voices of residents that have lived there for generations is heard. we have completed a mural on the side of the potrero health clinic. it was a community design process completed about a month ago. it's been extremely successful and has the names of community leaders and key politicians that residents believe were integral to the publication of the public housing. >> commissioner matsuda?
4:35 am
>> i would encourage you to engage in oral history to get the industries from the real voices. i think the public library, there are several resources where they can come out. it is already with the library archive and many resident s participated with that. he's been documenting and he has all the documentation and two videos done and there is a more recent documenting about the transformation of residents and their view of that as well as the neighborhood. >> as well as keeping the tangible
4:36 am
artifacts, flyers, reports, things like that would be really helpful. absolutely. >> commissioner wilson? >> yes, i agree with the findings that this was a very significant development originally and that it clearly doesn't have the integrity left. i think as part of that it would be important for the new development to recognize and interpret the history of the site that in 1941 there was a tremendous amount of on misinform. -- optimism. this wasn't done at all in this country that there's the idea that the government would actually create housing for people who couldn't afford it. i think it's really important and they would higher people like -- architect. it was an idea about creating a
4:37 am
community and using architecture that was really talented. >> any further comments? >> i think they want to come back later. >> moving forward without them coming back? >> there are a number of things about this project which are really important. many of which commissioner just mentioned. with projects like that there could be a lot of documentation and why? is it going to be seen by
4:38 am
anybody, is there going to be any access so the lessons learned from this project can be part of the community. >> commissioner in >> as a part of that, the housing complex in st. louis that was helded at the best thingfer, there is a film about it that is excellent that i saw recently and i know ms. wine stein talked about a video being made and some kind of documentation of a film being incredibly valuable so something gets seen. that's what's amazing about that. >> it's so important that the to study and this happened with capary knee green in chicago with this
4:39 am
built with many things in mind and then disasterous and why it didn't work out. >> i think we would like it to come back and it will give us the opportunity to come back and comment. so you would like to review and comment? >> yes. >> do we have anyone from the public who would like to speak on this item. we'll close public comment. thank you for your presentation. >> commissioners that places you on item 7. item 7: 2011.1374e r. schuett; 4155 575-90300 800 indiana street project draft eir west side of indiana street between 20th and 22nd streets; lot 009 assessor's block 4105 commission review and comment on the draft environmental impact report.
4:40 am
the proposed project includes demolition of the existing 78,240 gross-square-foot gsff, steel frame industrial warehouse that is owned by the san francisco opera, and used for set building and storage. the proposed demolition is necessary to construct a five-story, approximately 58-foot-tall, multi-family residential development, composed of three separate buildings, totaling 273,743 gsf of residential uses. the proposed project would include a maximum of 338 residential units, ground-floor residential amenities, and a one-level 11-foot-tall underground parking garage, for a total of approximately 441,183 gsf of development on the project site. the project site is located in the urban mixed use umuu zoning district, and 58-x height and bulk district, within the central waterfront subarea of the eastern neighborhoods rezoning and area plan. the proposed project also includes two streetscape improvement variants, the hybrid and linear park streetscape plans and a third variant that includes a plaza/dog park. the draft eir concluded that the implementation of the proposed project would result in a project-level significant unavoidable impact to historic architectural resources. the 800 indiana street building is individually eligible for listing in the california register of historical resources as noted in the central waterfront historic resource survey and the historic resource evaluation response hrerr for the project. the project site is located close to, but not within the dogpatch landmark district and the eligible central waterfront/3rd street industrial historic district. however, construction of the proposed residential development would not impair the integrity of the adjacent districts since the new construction is designed to address the massing and scale of the surrounding context. this public hearing is intended to assist the commission in its
4:41 am
preparation of comments on the draft environmental impact report deirr. comments made by members of the public at this hearing will not be considered comments on the deir and may not be responded to in the final eir feirr. the planning commission will hold a public hearing to receive comments on the deir on september 11, 2014. written comments on the deir will be accepted at the planning department until 5:00 p.m., september 29, 2014. sf 71234 >> environmental impact report. joining me is historic preservation specialist and environmental planner and supervise for this project and i would like to add there are members of the project sponsor and consultant team here as well. the item before you now is review and comment on the draft environmental impact report for the 800 indiana street project. the project site is located at indiana street between 20 and 22nd street. within the dog patch neighborhood in the southeast quadrant of the city. the sites adjacent to the freeway is currently developed with the 78,000 square foot industrial warehouse which was built around 1926. the wears -- the warehouse is being used. the warehouse and construction of a five 5 story approximately 58-foot tall multifamily residential development separate buildings each designed by different architectural firm for 237-gross square feet of residential uses. the proposed project would include 138 residential units. ground floor residential amenities and parking garage with up to 230 parking spaces. the eir also includes analysis of first scape improvement and dog plaza. the commissioner members were sent a draft copy of the eir of the public review period which began august 13th of this year and will
4:42 am
continue through september 29th. you were also given copies of historic resource evaluation finalized october 19th. today we are here to receive public testimony and formulate comments you may wish to submit on the draft e ishsr. before the summary of the findings of the summary eir, i would like to remind everyone that there is a public hearing on the draft eir been the planning commission scheduled for september 11th. today's hearing is intended to provide the public and opportunity to provide comments on as well as this commission when formatting comments for deir, members of the public should submit comments on the draft orally
4:43 am
at the planning commission hearing on writing to the environmental review officer by 5 :00 p.m. on september 29th. after the public comment period is closed the planning department will public document pertaining to all comments on the draft eir and we'll have an eir certification towards this end of this calendar year. after which presentation we are both available to answer any clarification or procedural questions that you may have. other substantive questions maybe responded to. thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners, rich krey, department staff. just to review the component of the draftier. it was construnthd for
4:44 am
industrial warehouse for the a.m. castle company for the historical is survey in 2002 and found eligible for the california register of historical resources therefore it's an eligible historical resource and demolishing this building. the draft ir includes documentation for the program and permit on-site for exhibit. however these mitigation measures would not impact at the single level. in addition the draft ire four alternative projects, a partial preservation alternative and full preservation alternative. the full preservation
4:45 am
alternative would result in a 58 build over three stores over one level subtraerngarage. so essentially the one program within the existing building. the full building results in 187 dwelling units and 131 parking spaces and 102 bicycle parking spaces. as compared to the project, 338 dwellings and 177 bicycle parking spaces. under this whole existing warehouse would not be demolished and the standards would be implemented. this alternative retains the existing warehouse structure as well as the two 2 story office portion of the building which are both character defining features. the preservation alternative as well as the no project alternative
4:46 am
would avoid resource impacts on the historical resource. also to the partial preservation alternatives, we have a project that has three fourths of residential use in the eastern section of the warehouse including residential use over podium level garage. the partial preservation results in about 280 dwelling units as opposed to 338 dwelling units. the alternative would still result in adverse impact on historical resources. i'm happy to answer any questions or clarifications on the finding of the draft environmental document. thank you. >> thank you, commissioners, questions or comments? no? okay. we'll open this up for public comment. no speaker cards inform -- inform this one. any member wish to
4:47 am
speak? seeing none . back to commission. commissioner wilson? >> seems to me they did a pretty good job with the present preservation alternative. the ire was done and thorough. sometimes we see these preservation alternatives that don't make any sense but this went seemed like it was a preservation alternative. >> i actually had a comment about that specifically. i know the building. it seems to me if you are putting with the preservation alternative, if you are putting units in it at all, you are cutting a lot of hole in it. as a warehouse, it's almost a two 2-block building with no opening other than the garage doors, the warehouse doors. >> that's a little setback though. >> as far as i understood it it seems the unit didn't come. it is
4:48 am
within the shell of it. >> maybe i missed that specifically. >> okay. if that meets it, then it seems like it was short of the project goals. do we comment also on the proposed project itself? or just on the historic? >> on the historic but also -- >> on the new project and how it fits into the dog patch? >> not how it fits -- >> but how it relates to the district? >> yeah. the building for the south has a lot of curving is surfaces which did seem very inconsistent with the characteristics of dog patch historical district. the other buildings seem more related to like the project across the street
4:49 am
in scale and detailing. but that one building did not seem to related. that was my comment. >> okay. any other comments? seeing none, we have those. thank you very much. we'll move on. >> city clerk: that will place you on item 8. item 8: 2014.0048h k. wong; 4155 575-91000 50 fell street north side of fell street between polk street and van ness avenue, assessor's block 0814, lot 010 - request for a major permit to alter for the exterior alteration of the historic property. the proposed project includes the insertion of two new door openings and installation of a new stair and accessible ramp, installation of a new gate at the site wall, and redesign of the existing courtyard into a playground. constructed in 1931 in the mission revival style, 50 fell street historically known as the viavi buildingg is an l-plan building consisting of a two-story brick wing on the east and three-story reinforced concrete wing to the north. the subject property is designated as a category 1 significant building under article 11 of the planning code. 1234 >> good afternoon commissioners, kelly, department staff. the project before you is a request for a major permit to alter 50 felt street. a category 1 significant building of the planning code. the building was
4:50 am
originally constructed in 1931 by ellis polk and company and known as the yabe building two 2 story concrete frame in the spanish colonial revival style. the l shaped building is divided into two wings and features sealed windows. rod iron ban bal balcony and courtyard specifically the project includes removal of a non-historic ramp and concrete stores, two new door entrances one at each wing, requiring removal of wall below and insertion of new painted steel door with surrounding lights. installation of awe new
4:51 am
painted frame and glass assembly, removal of a pair of non-historic door at the primary entrance, installation of a new painted aluminum door to match the historic redesign. repair of rod iron balcony and restore section beyond repair with new steel and not aluminum as outlined in in the staff report to match profiles. missing brick and new metal fence section to match existing and design and profiles and to clarify the new contemporary design and new steel gate and not aluminum as in the staff report. and the courtyard. the project was received by
4:52 am
the architectural review committee on july 15, 2014. the arc provided comments and recommendations on the proposed project which is included in your packet. to address these, the project sponsor made the following changes. one, the design of new doors was revised to be steel framed with hardware and profiles and patterns consistent with the building and two, the new ramp and stair assembly to the northeast corner of the courtyard. the overall design changed to a lighter and transparent design with glass panels and steel frames and rails and the primary entrance of the east wing is no longer obstructed and now through a new entrance and set of stairs. based on the drawing reports
4:53 am
andesite -- site visit, the proposed project meets the standard for provision of article 11 for the following reasons. the proposed project will be compatible with the historic materials features , size and scale and program and will be compatible with the character of the existing building and property. the design of the doors, ramp and stair assembly and gate draws upon the patterns and materials of the building but will be constructed using modern materials and recognized as a physical record of time and use and the proposed project will limit removal of distinctive material.
4:54 am
additionally the new element are all reversible and will not damage the historical property or the building. based on these finding. the department recommends approval with the following conditions. the following shall require review and approval by the planning department preservation staff. no. 1, final details of the ramp and stair assembly, 2, final details of the primary entrance door assembly at the east wing, 3, final details of the playground design. 4, specific treatment development and 5, finished sample pell for the proposed door assembly, new gates and new brick. the public received no inquiries for general information about the proposed project. however we received letter letter of support provided by the
4:55 am
project sponsor which is also included in your packet. the project sponsor team is here and has prepared a short presentation to review the details of the work. i'm available for questions and this conclusion my presentation. thank you.
4:56 am
>> while we bring that together we'll ge started. my name is larson, the operator of the proposed building. with me today are frederick nap from nap architect #50i8d -- i would like to start by thanking the commission and on working with us on the sped expedited timeline. they have given us a lot of comments as you heard and really made the project better. we are excited to be here today to work with you towards restoring this historic
4:57 am
building. it has been vacant for the past 15 years. with your support, come january we'll have over 200 children attend infant, toddlers and preschool programs at this location. we chose this property because it has four great attributes for a preschool building. it has a beautiful courtyard which we plan to build a grassy playground for the children. we like the location. it's close to public entrance is for the and the neighborhood is great to live there and work there. in the past year we've talked to many families in san francisco and they told us that finding quality child
4:58 am
care is difficult. they hope that this will restore the historic building and help us get our school started by january. thank you so much. >> good afternoon commissioners. we are great if ateful for the report we got from arc. we think their points and criticisms and ideas would help the project. we would like to go through three aspects today. improvement of the street facade and courtyard and design of the ramp. on the street facade, there are two main elements that are missing or damaged which is as you can see in the two lower corners of the left is existing on the right and you can see two pilars and you also see there is a
4:59 am
chain link gate now that is not original or compatible. we are proposing a compatible steel gate and on the upper left you see this ironwork is deteriorated and we are proposing to restore it and replace damages sections and and repair what is repairable. so it's attractive and more compatible with what you see today. >> good afternoon. i'm heather dennis from architect. we are doing improvements to the courtyard. the original courtyard contained pathways and a fountain. the existing courtyard you see there with curve and linear ramp
5:00 am
with stairs going up an entry door there. the proposed improvements we are creating an environment that satisfies the department of social services requirement for an active play area and we'll be adding a, introducing a landscape plan and adding three new trees and incorporating a fountain. you can see on the left is the existing courtyard and how much hard is surfaces there are and on the right we have all of the landscaping shown. the landscaping features are generally low lying naturalistic. there is no above the ground fixtures and they have been designed in such a way that they are reversible. in agreement with planning staff, the approved west courtyard ramp design

4 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on